This video explains the fradulent theory about what and who caused theBig Bang. I am sure you heard the discussion and The God Particleand about how the universe came to be. But this is so easily debunked, it holdsno water when it comes down to facts. See video at 11:00 minutes.What do you think ? And yes, this has more to do with Science than religion.But sometimes it is difficult to seperate the two.

At 7/23/2012 9:33:46 AM, drafterman wrote:Also, I'd love to see anything in the LHC's charter that indicates that they are looking for a science that specifically excludes a god.

The Fool: How does science lead to God hating..lol. You Hate only exist in Anger. Firstly you have to believe in God to be angry at him, and if youtrully believed he was infinitly Good, Well then you wouldn't hate him then now would. Either way, it makes a very slim case for the possiblity of hating him.

I think the big bang theory sucks anyways. Its not even falsifiable, it doesn't even claim non-existent anyways. Are there actually even scientist working on that or is it Just Theist, because either way it doesn't help us technology wise in any sense of the matter.

"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL

If a miricle is the impossible, then any other explanation is more likley to be true and is therefore BETTER!. (Hume re-masterd by The Fool)

Her being raped is more likley to be true.

"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL

"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL

If not them you must've been talking about the big bang -> http://en.wikipedia.org... Notice the word "theory" is absent. I don't see how making a scientific model of the universe and how it formed is "god-hating." Einstein said he wanted to know god's thoughts. That type of curiosity, to me, is far from hate.

"Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence."

At 7/23/2012 9:06:26 AM, inferno wrote:This video explains the fradulent theory about what and who caused theBig Bang. I am sure you heard the discussion and The God Particleand about how the universe came to be. But this is so easily debunked, it holdsno water when it comes down to facts. See video at 11:00 minutes.What do you think ? And yes, this has more to do with Science than religion.But sometimes it is difficult to seperate the two.

Haha..

Wouldya lookit that, it's the large, hadron, collider, can you believe that? Scientists to build a particle accelerator, can you beleive that? An accelerator.

Can you believe it, they say they want to understand the universe... can you believe that? With their accelerator. The bible is true because it says it is, and there isn't anything in the bible about these accelerators.

The Fool: He refers to the big bang theory as to complicated, "so I believe the bible" "god created everything its much easier too understand" but then he trys to explain that the Trinity makes sense.

"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL

At 7/23/2012 11:31:03 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:Using Jack van Impe is almost as laughable as the "Atheist's Worst Nightmare."

Truly astonishing that grown men can be this stupid. Such bad arguments it's hard to conceive of it not being an elaborate troll.

False. Atheists are every bit as fallible with their logic, because if a scientist or secularist disbelieves what they do, then they usually make lame excuses anddo not have any answer for this.But again, you are another who will not investigate or explore the supernatural.But when people like you do, they wind up believing anyway.

At 7/23/2012 11:13:02 AM, drafterman wrote:I also resent the assertion that I, as an atheist, do anything less than full cocked.

Yes, you are an Atheist.

But your views are more about not accepting the truth about who God is. It seems that your logic is more emotional than it is about facts.

Its easy to make jokes about this my friend.But it only makes you look weak.

I didn't make that joke. Richard Pryor did. I only referenced it. While I appreciate the confusion, I can't really claim to be even in the same realm of comedic genius as that man. That's even counting Superman III.

At 7/23/2012 11:13:02 AM, drafterman wrote:I also resent the assertion that I, as an atheist, do anything less than full cocked.

Yes, you are an Atheist.

But your views are more about not accepting the truth about who God is. It seems that your logic is more emotional than it is about facts.

Its easy to make jokes about this my friend.But it only makes you look weak.

I didn't make that joke. Richard Pryor did. I only referenced it. While I appreciate the confusion, I can't really claim to be even in the same realm of comedic genius as that man. That's even counting Superman III.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

At 7/23/2012 11:13:02 AM, drafterman wrote:I also resent the assertion that I, as an atheist, do anything less than full cocked.

Yes, you are an Atheist.

But your views are more about not accepting the truth about who God is. It seems that your logic is more emotional than it is about facts.

Its easy to make jokes about this my friend.But it only makes you look weak.

I didn't make that joke. Richard Pryor did. I only referenced it. While I appreciate the confusion, I can't really claim to be even in the same realm of comedic genius as that man. That's even counting Superman III.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

At 7/23/2012 11:13:02 AM, drafterman wrote:I also resent the assertion that I, as an atheist, do anything less than full cocked.

Yes, you are an Atheist.

But your views are more about not accepting the truth about who God is. It seems that your logic is more emotional than it is about facts.

Its easy to make jokes about this my friend.But it only makes you look weak.

I didn't make that joke. Richard Pryor did. I only referenced it. While I appreciate the confusion, I can't really claim to be even in the same realm of comedic genius as that man. That's even counting Superman III.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

If you were a true intellectual, then you would know that the answer you dictate upon us is not that simple. So again, a simple mind begats simple things.It is not our fault that you are not able to discern such spiritual and complexissues.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

If you were a true intellectual, then you would know that the answer you dictate upon us is not that simple. So again, a simple mind begats simple things.It is not our fault that you are not able to discern such spiritual and complexissues.

I dictate no answer to you. In fact, I just admitted that we live in a sea of unknown, questions who's answers we don't know.

As far as not being able to discern the spiritual, that isn't my fault either. Yet you subscribe to a morally bankrupt philosophy that would have been suffer some less-than-ideal fate because of that.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

If you were a true intellectual, then you would know that the answer you dictate upon us is not that simple. So again, a simple mind begats simple things.It is not our fault that you are not able to discern such spiritual and complexissues.

I dictate no answer to you. In fact, I just admitted that we live in a sea of unknown, questions who's answers we don't know.

As far as not being able to discern the spiritual, that isn't my fault either. Yet you subscribe to a morally bankrupt philosophy that would have been suffer some less-than-ideal fate because of that.

Don't blame me, blame your God.

I blame noone for anything. You must learn to accept some things as they are, or it will be the death of you soon.This is such a complex issue, and you are not allowing yourself to acceptthe impossible. Nothing is impossible. So why do you just assume thatwe do not know what we are talking about just because you lack theability to discern what we can.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

If you were a true intellectual, then you would know that the answer you dictate upon us is not that simple. So again, a simple mind begats simple things.It is not our fault that you are not able to discern such spiritual and complexissues.

I dictate no answer to you. In fact, I just admitted that we live in a sea of unknown, questions who's answers we don't know.

As far as not being able to discern the spiritual, that isn't my fault either. Yet you subscribe to a morally bankrupt philosophy that would have been suffer some less-than-ideal fate because of that.

Don't blame me, blame your God.

I blame noone for anything.

Which is a problem. If you really believe in a God, then you need to start blaming him for a lot of things.

You must learn to accept some things as they are, or it will be the death of you soon.

Such a vaguely worded threat. Why don't you tell me what these things are, how they will cause my death, and how soon it will be.

This is such a complex issue, and you are not allowing yourself to acceptthe impossible. Nothing is impossible.

If nothing is impossible then it shouldn't matter that I don't accept the impossible, since excluding the impossible excludes nothing, by definition.

So why do you just assume thatwe do not know what we are talking about just because you lack theability to discern what we can.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

If you were a true intellectual, then you would know that the answer you dictate upon us is not that simple. So again, a simple mind begats simple things.It is not our fault that you are not able to discern such spiritual and complexissues.

I dictate no answer to you. In fact, I just admitted that we live in a sea of unknown, questions who's answers we don't know.

As far as not being able to discern the spiritual, that isn't my fault either. Yet you subscribe to a morally bankrupt philosophy that would have been suffer some less-than-ideal fate because of that.

Don't blame me, blame your God.

I blame noone for anything.

Which is a problem. If you really believe in a God, then you need to start blaming him for a lot of things.

You must learn to accept some things as they are, or it will be the death of you soon.

Such a vaguely worded threat. Why don't you tell me what these things are, how they will cause my death, and how soon it will be.

This is such a complex issue, and you are not allowing yourself to acceptthe impossible. Nothing is impossible.

If nothing is impossible then it shouldn't matter that I don't accept the impossible, since excluding the impossible excludes nothing, by definition.

So why do you just assume thatwe do not know what we are talking about just because you lack theability to discern what we can.

I don't assume that.

No. I do not blame God because He is perfect. Man is mortal, He is not.So of all of the unperfect things that you do is only a reflection of yourmentality which is actually under your control in terms of Free Will.So the question is this. Why have you chosen not to believe, when all youhave to do is believe. Again, you are at fault. Not God.

Again, your sarcasm represents weakness.You are not willing to go outside of your box and dive deep into the unknown.You are a coward using secularism as your ideology or livelihood.You are the one who is confused.

I'm not the one that adheres to a philosophy who's answers to all questions are "God did it."

We all live in the unknown, I'm just willing to admit it, whereas you put a bag over your head think happy thoughts to yourself.

If you were a true intellectual, then you would know that the answer you dictate upon us is not that simple. So again, a simple mind begats simple things.It is not our fault that you are not able to discern such spiritual and complexissues.

I dictate no answer to you. In fact, I just admitted that we live in a sea of unknown, questions who's answers we don't know.

As far as not being able to discern the spiritual, that isn't my fault either. Yet you subscribe to a morally bankrupt philosophy that would have been suffer some less-than-ideal fate because of that.

Don't blame me, blame your God.

I blame noone for anything.

Which is a problem. If you really believe in a God, then you need to start blaming him for a lot of things.

You must learn to accept some things as they are, or it will be the death of you soon.

Such a vaguely worded threat. Why don't you tell me what these things are, how they will cause my death, and how soon it will be.

This is such a complex issue, and you are not allowing yourself to acceptthe impossible. Nothing is impossible.

If nothing is impossible then it shouldn't matter that I don't accept the impossible, since excluding the impossible excludes nothing, by definition.

So why do you just assume thatwe do not know what we are talking about just because you lack theability to discern what we can.

I don't assume that.

No. I do not blame God because He is perfect. Man is mortal, He is not.So of all of the unperfect things that you do is only a reflection of yourmentality which is actually under your control in terms of Free Will.So the question is this. Why have you chosen not to believe, when all youhave to do is believe. Again, you are at fault. Not God.

I'm more interested in this warning you've issued me. Or have your testes shrivelled up since you issued it and you no longer lack enough vertebrae to expound on it?

I came here looking for scientific inaccuracies in the Big Bang Theory TV series :(

There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. " Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, which presents the difficulties.